[shmem] and kernel 2.4 / linuxthreads
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/81ae4/81ae48adfe70a9850cb02b1751eba005e05cbe00" alt=""
Hi all, I noticed that kernel 2.6 is a requirement for shmem on linux. Is it possible to get shmem to run - maybe with constraints - together with kernel 2.4 and the older pthread version (linuxthreads)? A start on a kernel 2.4 box produces a segmentation fault in shared_memory.hpp. To reach most users as possible, it would be nice to be compatible or if not possible to get as a minimum a normal termination. Sascha Lumma
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/38c13/38c13dc5a3211b15354ca494d1f3a396af2dcaf0" alt=""
Sascha Lumma(e)k dio:
Hi all,
I noticed that kernel 2.6 is a requirement for shmem on linux. Is it possible to get shmem to run - maybe with constraints - together with kernel 2.4 and the older pthread version (linuxthreads)? A start on a kernel 2.4 box produces a segmentation fault in shared_memory.hpp. To reach most users as possible, it would be nice to be compatible or if not possible to get as a minimum a normal termination.
Sascha Lumma
Sorry, 2.4 has no process-shared primitives, and it's not a priority to emulate them. If anyone wants to contribute them, they are welcome ;-) I agree that process-crash is not an correct result, but could you investigate what's happening? Maybe an exception is being thrown when constructing a process shared mutex and that should be a correct error report, IMHO. Regards, Ion
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/81ae4/81ae48adfe70a9850cb02b1751eba005e05cbe00" alt=""
Ion Gaztañaga wrote:
Sascha Lumma(e)k dio:
Hi all,
I noticed that kernel 2.6 is a requirement for shmem on linux. Is it possible to get shmem to run - maybe with constraints - together with kernel 2.4 and the older pthread version (linuxthreads)? A start on a kernel 2.4 box produces a segmentation fault in shared_memory.hpp. To reach most users as possible, it would be nice to be compatible or if not possible to get as a minimum a normal termination.
Sascha Lumma
Sorry, 2.4 has no process-shared primitives, and it's not a priority to emulate them. If anyone wants to contribute them, they are welcome ;-)
I agree that process-crash is not an correct result, but could you investigate what's happening? Maybe an exception is being thrown when constructing a process shared mutex and that should be a correct error report, IMHO.
Regards,
Ion _______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
Thank you for the reply. The way i get this segmentation fault is just that i want to open_or_create a segment with the following statement. if (!segment.open_or_create(SHMNAME,SHMMAX,(void*)0x30000000)) { ..... In function shared_memory::GlobalNamedScopedMutex::acquire() sem_open (line 534) returns 0 and not -1 like expected in this case and sem_wait() gets this zero pointer as parameter. Sorry for the really short posting without any information for you. I want to improve myself ;-) Sascha
participants (2)
-
Ion Gaztañaga
-
Sascha Lumma